The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-02-22
Opinion OF Judge Sam. p. walker

Opinion of Judge Sam. p. walker.
Ia order to get at the lega status OF
the c3se, several leading lepa gentle.
men were questioned aud sgreed with
singular unanimity. The Fl at lawyer
in'ervie we'd was Judge s. p. Walker,
Guy Attorney. From his peculiar re-
lstions with the ci y government he
was sverse to giving any opinion, but
under pres ure finally Ielented and
said:
"In reglrd to the first part of the
lecture, will say that the Judgs read
the ststuts with substantial correct
ness, Just as any other man would
have cad the Code, section 6607. But
tn implication that would be drawn
by every member OF the community,
from the fact that Judge DuBose did
summon Mr.. Hadden before him and
read that provision in The statute law
to him, in my opinion would be that
Mr. Hidden had been guilty OF the
offense de ned in that section of the
Cude. The proceeding throughout is
such that L fJrbear to EXPIRE any
opinion about it. Jude DuBose had
no more rightful power 10 call Mr..
Hadden before him for such purpose
than he had to have summoned Judge
Elicit, of The Chan cssy Court, or Judge
Ester, of the Circuit Court, aud sub.
jected either OF them to the same lect.
urAl il flicion.
"rhat sec ION OF the Code Is a gen.
eral law tf the State, applicable as
much to judge DuBNs as to any
other of the States Ulcers who are
embraced within its terms; and when
thai il said, it is all that can be said
upon this su CT, until some officer
has, in some regular and jldicislly
conducted proceed ng, b on srIaigned
and tried for its violat on.
"a to he legal propositions of the
lecture, following the one of which |
have jns sp ken, l believe it quiie
safe 10 sly that they are not only I'M
tenable throughout, hat have been
repeatedly 30 prom unfed by our Su.
preme CDu't The ma N one of these
proJ ositions ia, that if a felony has
been commlttid the greater includes
the lesser ofiense, and the city gov.
erDment cannot fine the offender,
thnngh the act committed bring him
wi hin the terms If the city ordinance
and constitutes q breach ereof
W thout going further with regard to
that prop sition, it is enough to say
that in three cases which went from
Judge DUB ise's own cou t, before he
went upon the bench Of that court,
the Supreme Curt Of Tennessee has
dec dsd the exact opposite OF the
proposition as laid down in the lee
ture (See Is Les, page 240; State ex
rel. Kari VS.. IT, king District
"On the quf stion of lictnsed gam
bling, the Judge OF the Criminal
Court, bt cked by the grand ju is and
the entire executive forces OF the
S ate, certainly has ample power to
suppress gambl NJ entirely il the pub
C sentiment demands that sucn
course shC nd be taken; and If gam
bling HOUSE, continue to run it can no
more be laid at II door of the muniC-
ipsl government t1an at that Of the
Criminal Court.
Gas to the arrest If the deputy
sberiffs, l pTetume that no l8wy,r
doubts but that they ave ss much
liable to arrest and punishment for
breach Of the city ordinances as any
other memoir OF he community, and
the fact that they are deput I'd ss
sheriffs to execute the pre- Ce Of the
Criminal or any ether court, does not
depnt re them to violate the city ordi-
naUces.
GAS to the assertion that the Crimi-
nal Curt does not arr st the police
men OF the city, look in the last vol
ume OF decisions of the Supreme
Court, (16L Lea, p. $40, Stae VS. R1gerf)
will show that the Timinal Court has
not hPsitated to arrest aud Try any po-
lice officer of The C ty for an actual or
suppo ed violation OF the laws Of the
s ~e AS matter OF course, every city
officer is subj ct to the laws Of the
State, end il is equally true that very
State fiji Ger is Blu bjeCt to the munich.
pal law. And there is end can be no
clash between the officers charged
with the tx9Cu ion Of their lave, 30
long as both SETS If Ia Es are properly
and judicisly Administered. "
"Ibe lecture seems to proceed upon
the idea thst the City Court is en- in
ienot Criminal Court, subj act to the
general summary ard supervisory
power Of the Orr ninsl Court. In fact
it is no such thiog Poo ediDgs in
the City Court are civil proceedings,
acc mpsn ed, it Ia true, by prelimj-
nary arrest Of the person OF the de-
fer dant; but nevertheless it remains a
civil proceeding for the recovery OF a
penaly or fine. No fppesl lies rom
is judgment to the criminal Cour
nor eau its judament be reversed in
the Criminal Court, in any 10 m ct
proceeding. OF course any judge OF
court Of record can, upon proper pro